@tao@mathstodon.xyz I only see a small number of potential solutions to this problem: 1. We do focus on discussing AI capability instead. Then there is at least some objectivity involved. Personally, I do not actually think that AI capability is far removed from the things you care about. To me, whatever AI is *not* capable of replicating are the skills that we will value in the long run. Let me put it this way: if there is nothing that an AI can't do that we can do, then an AI will eventually be able to solve this crisis for us! Do you believe that an AI can't solve this crisis for us? Then we must defend that view rigorously! 2. We try our best to adopt the standards of philosophers: double blind peer reviewed essays on the subject, rigorously drawing from the philosophical tradition (in terms of references and methods) so that we may avoid 'clout' having too much of an influence on the direction of the field. 3. Invent a new foundational paradigm for these kinds of meta-discussions. I am not sure what this would look like, but perhaps its possible.